| ARTICLE REVIEW: KATHERINE GRIFFIN (2002) - 'FRIENDS - THE SECRET TO A LONGER LIFE' (TAKEN FROM READER'S DIGEST, SEPTEMBER 2002) |
| I found this article to be extremely interesting (considering it is written for a popular magazine). It is one which points out both the obvious psychosocial benefits of having friends and 'social support networks', as well as the 'not so obvious' medical benefits of friendships. The article begins with an example of a woman whose 22 year-old daughter was killed in a car accident. While she suffered weeks and months of grief, she recieved emotional support from here relatives, church members and neighbours (all of whom lived in the same rural town). But, best of all, was her long time high school friend, who also lost a 21 year-old daughter a year earlier. Both these women understood each other 'like no other'. Griffin (2002) then goes on to state that people with friends and social support networks are shown to: 1. Have a greater chance of surviving life-threatening illnesses, like heart disease and cancer; 2. Have a stronger, more resilient immune system; 3. Enjoy better mental health (and be less subject to problems like depression or anxiety); 4. And live longer than those *without* any social support at all. She cites a study by Teresa Seeman, an immunologist from the University of California in LA. Seeman stated that friendships helped *moderate* that effects of stress: 1. Stress is the 'fight or flight' reaction to an aversive stimulus: when aroused, the subject's levels of stress hormones (such as norephineprine and cortisol) are raised, leading to an increased heart rate, greater muscle tension and the nervous system being 'on alert'; 2. Consequently, physical problems result, like increased blood pressure, constricted arteries and the blood's tendency to clot - all leading to heart disease; 3. Having a friend about during a stressful task helped (even when they are not actually helping with the task at hand), which (in turn) made the task-doer's heart rate and blood pressure less likely to rise; Another study by immunologist Glaser, and his wife/psychologist Janice Kiecolt-Glaser, had shown how social support had helped reduce the effects of stress on the immune system. They tracked to health of 69 people caring for spoused with Alzheimer's Disease. Again, guess who got the better end of the stick? Yes, it was those caregivers with support networks, who had stronger immune responses to diseases (like the flu) than those without such support. One likely reason for these results is that because there are fewer stress hormones in the body, the immune system is less likely to be 'on the alert' to stress hormones, and can be more vigilant to bacteria and viruses. If your 'best friend' is your spouse, this is even better - especially if you are a man! Men are most likely to get their emotional needs met by the women in their lives, rather than their male friends. What if your friend is really your foe? Griffin (2002) further states that some friendships can make you feel more 'depleted' rather than 'invigorated'. According to Seeman (the epidemologist), social interactions which are hostile, conflicted or less-than-supportive have few, if any, benefits. These 'friendships' are often either based on a one-way dependency by one party on another, or they are filled with 'unhealthy competition', or both (I wish I had a dollar for each time this had happened to me). In turn, such 'friendships' can raise stress levels rather then reduce them (I'd be unhealthy, but rich \m/). Is having many or just a few friends better? Some studies had shown that having a 'wide range of support networks' affords the best protection from 'stress'. Others, however, have pointed out the importance of having (at least) a few 'special' people in your life. I am inclined to agree, because having just a few 'good' friends in my life is preferable than having no friends at all, or having many fake friends that take advantage. The article ends with a paragraph on the same two women. About five years after their daughters being killed, their husbands died later, and they were (again) around to help each other out and even celebrate their eighty-fourth birthdays together!!! Isn't that sweet? :-) But, like the song says, 'That's what friends are for'. |